Implications of Contradictions

  • Thread starter Thread starter dchernik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, if the Bible had proposed both that 2 + 2 = 5 and that 2 + 2 = 77, there would be people who would eagerly set to work proving to their own satisfaction that there was no contradiction here whatsoever.

I’m not a Biblical “scholar” and do not want to become one. The fanatics can enjoy “resolving” Biblical contradictions to their heart’s content.

That’s why I prefer simply to hold that the Catholic Church, over its 2,000-year long existence, has, through Herculean effort, distilled a modest but indispensable number of true articles of faith from the astonishing phantasmagoria of the Bible’s historical assertions.
 
Last edited:
Here’s my preferred solution:

When there is a seeming contradiction between two accounts, the two all but annihilate each other, and in such a case, we end up lacking any information about what actually happened. So, let’s find all such contradictions, disclaim in every case that we know the truth, and see what remains. It is open to Catholics to argue that in the Bible everything supports and nothing contradicts the authoritative teachings of the Church on faith and morals.
 
dchernik said:
So, let’s find all such contradictions, disclaim in every case that we know the truth,
Click to expand...
Going through 73 books in order to look for, and argue about, possible contradictions is not the way allot of Catholics will want to spend their time. Fundamentalists and atheists will likely be more inclined to spend allot of time doing just that though. Maybe it is because they only have to go through 66 books, I’m not sure. But for whatever reason, I think you will have better luck there.

On the other hand if you think you have passage that is contradicted by scripture in an important way, then I think many Catholics would like to think the matter through with you.
 
joemccarron, I have proposed a research program. Doesn’t mean I personally ought to drop whatever I’m doing right now and work on it. At any rate, the contradictions have already been identified; see for example the Skeptic’s Bible linked to above. Going through them and verifying that they do not undermine the teachings of the Church might be a useful exercise.
 
joemccarron said:
if you think you have passage that is contradicted by scripture in an important way, then I think many Catholics would like to think the matter through with you.
Click to expand...
Proverbs 8:12 and Proverbs 14:15 praise prudence. But Mark 16:17-18 says that believers can handle snakes and if they drink poison it will not harm them. Note: many believing Christians have died by handling snakes or drinking poison so it does not seem to be prudent to do so.
 
AlNg said:
Proverbs 8:12 and Proverbs 14:15 praise prudence. But Mark 16:17-18 says that believers can handle snakes and if they drink poison it will not harm them. Note: many believing Christians have died by handling snakes or drinking poison so it does not seem to be prudent to do so.
Click to expand...
Are you supposed to read Proverbs and Mark together in the same light? I doubt simply pairing verses together make any sense. There are over 30,000 verses in the Bible that can produce tons of combinations.
 
dchernik said:
But Christianity is supposed to be grounded in actual historical events. If these details are wrong, what other history is wrong, too?

Again, “The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, ‘Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.’ Then he said, ‘Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.’ He replied to him, ‘Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.’” (Lk 23)

NABRE comments: “This episode is recounted only in this gospel. The penitent sinner receives salvation through the crucified Jesus.”

Indeed, in the other 3 gospels, the criminals crucified around Jesus all revile Him.

Is the historical truth here, too, irrelevant?
Click to expand...
Yup. Irrelevant. Doesn’t matter.
 
dchernik said:
joemccarron, I have proposed a research program. Doesn’t mean I personally ought to drop whatever I’m doing right now and work on it. At any rate, the contradictions have already been identified; see for example the Skeptic’s Bible linked to above. Going through them and verifying that they do not undermine the teachings of the Church might be a useful exercise.
Click to expand...
Although the Catholic church approves a variety of Bible translations, you will look in vain for a single “official” Vatican-approved book of interpretation. There’s a good reason for that. Take your example of the conversion of Paul. You could have Catholics explain the apparent contradictions in different ways, as they have here. You have people like me and joemccarron who think it just doesn’t matter. Who’s right? We all are. We are all good Catholics. And the Vatican has no reason to say “You’re right about this” or “You’re wrong about that” as long as well all stay within the confines of Church teaching.

What woud be outside Church teaching? For example if someone came along and claimed that the voice Paul heard was Satan. Or that Paul just pretended to convert. Those interpretations would be unacceptable because they are outside the consensus of Catholic belief.

I personally disagree with those who spend a lot of time and effort trying to “reconcile” or defend details that I think are unimportant. That doesn’t mean I think they are bad Catholics. They’re simply taking a different approach. We all have the same basic beliefs in terms of doctrine.

You are insisting on taking a viewpoint that is at odds with both Dei Verbum and the catechism. That’s up to you. But don’t say “If you don’t believe this unimportant detail the whole edifice crumbles.” It does not. You may believe it, but that’s not the official position of the Church. So please don’t pretend that it is.
 
I find that contradictions within Sacred Scripture are invitations to question. Questions that have answers that can reveal hidden truth.
 
AlNg said:
Is it prudent to handle poisonous snakes and to drink poison?
Click to expand...
If one is trained, one can handled poisonous snakes prudently. It is not OK to drink poison as that may end up in committing suicide which is against God’s intent. Having said that about poison, it is routine for many people to ingest poison regularly. Alcohol. Nicotine.

But in the context of Mark 16:17-18, unless you have been gifted with those signs, one shouldn’t be foolish in daredevil acts in testing whether one has the gift or not. If one is not sure, most likely not gifted. Misplaced confidence is not a good thing to have for life threatening situations. Jumping off the roof expecting God to pop in and saving them is not a smart move. I don’t know the statistics for people doing daredevil acts that ended in death. Those with gifts most likely do not broadcast nor need to seek assurance. They know what they have.
 
Nah, I don’t mean those kinds of contradictions. I’ll post an example of the kind I mean.

Matthew 11:11
Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist;

Now doesn’t that contradict the truth about Jesus? Isn’t Jesus the greatest man? Is Jesus saying John is greater than Himself? Jesus had a mom. With this short sentence Jesus reveals He is God. After all you can’t just say you’re God.

The people of the time would have got it. Born of woman was a euphemism that identified anyone descended from Adam and Eve. Who wasn’t? Well, Jesus was revealing He wasn’t.
 
Last edited:
Benadam said:
Now doesn’t that contradict the truth about Jesus? Isn’t Jesus the greatest man? Is Jesus saying John is greater than Himself? Jesus had a mom. With this short sentence Jesus reveals He is God. After all you can’t just say you’re God.
Click to expand...
Jesus qualified the statement " yet he who is least in the kingdom is greater than he". It is a contradiction if “greatest” is a known item. But we don’t. Greatest in what sense? Jesus said John can be greatest and yet not. Is it greatest for all time or just the relevant period? Or is it greatest on earth but not in heaven? Or was John the greatest because he cleared the path for the Lord? I don’t know the answer.
 
ericc said:
Jesus qualified the statement " yet he who is least in the kingdom is greater than he". It is a contradiction if “greatest” is a known item. But we don’t. Greatest in what sense? Jesus said John can be greatest and yet not. Is it greatest for all time or just the relevant period? Or is it greatest on earth but not in heaven? Or was John the greatest because he cleared the path for the Lord? I don’t know the answer.
Click to expand...
His listeners would have been thinking of the kind of greatness attached to someone written about in their sacred texts, someone waited for for centuries, someone who was a legend in his own time like John the Baptist. Jesus validated that kind of greatness by telling them who John was in their scriptures.

What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. 10 This is the one about whom it is written,

‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you,
who will prepare your way before you.’

and again a few passages down John is given even greater status in their mind, so great in fact Jesus lets them know it will be difficult to accept.

and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. 15 Let anyone with ears listen!
 
Last edited:
ericc said:
Jesus qualified the statement " yet he who is least in the kingdom is greater than he".
Click to expand...
This statement wasn’t about John but about the state of life in heaven. After all, John the Baptist went to heaven.
And besides, Jesus knew John’s ministry, He knew John’s followers were being prepared for union with Him.
 
Last edited:
In OT there’s something called Hebraism. It’s a kind of special effects in Jewish literature. They intentionally make exaggerations (even contradictions) to make memorization more easier. Remember that what is written in the Bible was an oral tradition first.

All these exaggerations, contradictions and discrepancies are just adiaphora.

Can you show us some contradiction in matters of doctrine? The Bible is about doctrines of salvation.
 
Last edited:
Benadam said:
This statement wasn’t about John but about the state of life in heaven. After all, John the Baptist went to heaven.
Click to expand...
You missed the point. It is about John’s quality of being “greatest”. Jesus just praised him being the greatest and in the same breadth, saying he is the least. At the time of saying this, John was still alive. Jesus didn’t say what was so great about John so we shouldn’t spin stories nor assume. There were no mention of miracles performed by John so his greatness must be of a different sort.
 
ericc said:
Jesus didn’t say what was so great about John so we shouldn’t spin stories nor assume.
Click to expand...
Benadam said:
His listeners would have been thinking of the kind of greatness attached to someone written about in their sacred texts, someone waited for for centuries, someone who was a legend in his own time like John the Baptist. Jesus validated that kind of greatness by telling them who John was in their scriptures.
Jesus said:
What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. 10 This is the one about whom it is written,

‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you,

who will prepare your way before you.’

and again a few passages down John is given even greater status in their mind, so great in fact Jesus lets them know it will be difficult to accept.

Jesus said:
and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. 15 Let anyone with ears listen!
Click to expand...
Doesn’t seem like you read this. Jesus explained John’s greatness and it exceeded the expectations of His listeners.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top